LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksAnything that doesn't qualify as a pat on the back to a jew, is automatically anti semitism. It could never be something like, say, jews doing things that piss people off? Naaaaaaw, jews are perfect!
Wise-Cracker
Anything that doesn't qualify as a pat on the back to a jew, is automatically anti semitism. It could never be something like, say, jews doing things that piss people off? Naaaaaaw, jews are perfect!
Machiavelli Incarnate
[quote=houseknight;2160549]"There's nothing magical about the 'success' of jews -- they're simply a highly organized and networked gang of thieves and murderers that have been perfecting their craft for over 2,000 years."
-This antisemitic refrain is clearly designed to wash brains. Now, let's compare Martin Luther's quote with the sense TATA's refrain.QUOTE]Jews made an excessive contribution for human civilisation, despite of 2,000 years of persecutions and legal discrimination, not to mention pogroms and genocide.[/
That statement is clearly to wash brains..as there's no proof of what you say is true..by any stretch of the imagination...including those persecutions!
Seems, for all the persecutions and discriminations..Jews have managed to survive in tact with never a character or behavior change..
Do you think Jews suvival might be due to the sufferance of the rulers at the time...'like who would have ever objected in those good old days of persecutions"??
As I see it, no one would have objected ..so logic would say...there were no genocides..always a bon voyage wave at the borders..
Please enumerate Jewish contributions to society..Other then discriminations against the indigenous which Jews practice to this day..and with their improved financial practices..which invariably led to all those expulsions ..I can't think of any contributions Jews have made.....so help me out on those please, if you can!
TATA
Political Mastermind
Simply, let search Wikipedia or other net sources.Originally Posted by Eann
Political Mastermind
http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=19101
December 18, 2009
The ugly truth about Britain’s Foreign Office
Recently, the historian Andrew Roberts delivered a remarkable address at the annual dinner of the Anglo-Israel Association.
...there was the notorious 1939 White Paper, which severely limited Jewish immigration into Palestine at precisely the period of their greatest need, during the Final Solution. A total upper limit of 75,000 Jewish immigrants was set for the fateful years 1940-44, a figure that was also intended to cover refugee emergencies. The White Paper was published on 9 November 1938 – the very same day as the Kristallnacht atrocities in Germany – and was approved by Parliament in May 1939, a full two months after Hitler’s occupation of the rump of Czechoslovakia. The Manchester Guardian described it as ‘a death sentence on tens of thousands of Central European Jews’, which in sheer numerical terms was probably an underestimation. Although the Labour Party Conference voted to repeal the White Paper in 1945, the Labour Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin – a bitter enemy of Israel - persisted in it, and it was not to be repealed until the day after the State of Israel was proclaimed.
In late April 1948, Bevin ordered that Arab positions in Jaffa needed to be protected from the Jews [quote] ‘at all costs’, and when Israeli independence came the next month, the departing British sometimes handed over vital military and strategic strongpoints to the five invading Arab armies, the most efficient of which, Transjordan’s Arab Legion, was actually commanded by a Briton, Sir John Glubb. And then on New Year’s Eve 1948 the British Government actually issued an ultimatum to Israel threatening war if Israel did not halt its counter-attacks on Egyptian forces in the Gaza Strip and Sinai. Britain was the only country in the UN that came to Egypt’s aid in this regard.
One can easily see, therefore, why when Brig-Gen Sir Wyndham Deedes set up the Anglo-Israeli Association only weeks after Israel was finally recognized by Britain in 1949 - months after America, Russia and several other states had already done so – it was much-needed. ...
When in May 1967 Nasser announced the blockading of the Straits of Tiran, closing Israel’s commercial lifeline to the east, the guarantors of this international waterway – including Britain – failed to act quickly or decisively, and although Harold Wilson was proud of his pro-Israeli sentiments, his foreign secretary George Brown and the FO certainly did not reciprocate them. Britain compounded its generally lukewarm attitude during the Six Day War by sponsoring Resolution 242 at the end of it, which called on Israel to withdraw [quote] ‘from territories occupied’, in a resolution that was so badly worded by the FO that Arabs and Israelis have been able to argue over its proper meaning ever since.
The Yom Kippur War of October 1973 saw even worse bias by the FO in favour of the Arabs and against the Jews. Announcing an arms embargo ‘equally’ between the belligerents, the Heath Government effectively stopped Israel buying spare parts for the IDF’s Centurion tanks, whilst allowing them to be bought by Jordan, the only other country affected, because it was not (officially at least) a belligerent. ...Heath even refused to allow American cargo planes taking supplies to Israel to land and refuel at our bases on Cyprus.
In the 1980s Margaret Thatcher seemed to offer a new warmth to Anglo-Israeli relations. She sat for Finchley, her Methodism chimed well with Jewish values, and she was the most philo-Semitic PM since Churchill, yet even she was stymied by the FO, especially over Intelligence cooperation with Mossad. It’s true that John Major sent a special SAS unit to seek and destroy Iraqi Scud missile batteries targeting Israel during the First Gulf War, but that was largely to remove the danger of Israel retaliating, and thereby perhaps destroying the Arab coalition against Saddam.
After 9/11 Tony Blair seemed to appreciate how Israel was in the very front line in the War against Terror, and he thus bravely refused to condemn Israel’s acts of self-defence in Lebanon, but since then Britain’s contribution to the EU’s strand of negotiating over Iran’s nuclear ambitions has been, frankly, pathetic.
One area of policy over which the FO has traditionally held great sway is in the question of Royal Visits. It is no therefore coincidence that although HMQ has made over 250 official overseas visits to 129 different countries during her reign, neither she nor one single member of the British royal family has ever been to Israel on an official visit....“Official visits are organized and taken on the advice of the Foreign and Commonwealth office,” a press officer for the royal family explained when Prince Edward visited Israel recently privately - and a spokesman for the Foreign Office replied that [quote] ‘Israel is not unique” in not having received an official royal visit, because [quote] ‘Many countries have not had an official visit.’ That might be true for Burkino Faso and Chad, but the FO has somehow managed to find the time over the years to send the Queen on State visits to Libya, Iran, Sudan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Jordan & Turkey. So it can’t have been that she wasn’t in the area.
...The true reason of course, is that the Foreign Office has a ban on official Royal visits to Israel, which is even more powerful for its being unwritten and unacknowledged. As an act of delegitimization of Israel, this effective boycott is quite as serious as other similar acts, such as the academic boycott, and is the direct fault of the FO Arabists.
...
Because there are 22 ambassadors to Arab countries, and only one to Israel, it is perhaps natural that the FO should tend to be more pro-Arab than pro-Israeli. ...It seems to me that there is an implicit racism going on here. Jews are expected to behave better, goes the FO thinking, because they are like us. Arabs must not be chastised because they are not. So in warfare, we constantly expect Israel to behave far better than her neighbours, and chastise her quite hypocritically when occasionally under the exigencies of national struggle, she cannot. The problem crosses political parties today, just as it always has. William Hague called for Israel to adopt a proportionate response in its struggle with Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2007, as though proportionate responses ever won any victories against fascists. In the Second World War, the Luftwaffe killed 50,000 Britons in the Blitz, and the Allied response was to kill 600,000 Germans – twelve times the number and hardly a proportionate response, but one that contributed mightily to victory. Who are we therefore to lecture the Israelis on how proportionate their responses should be?
Very often in Britain, especially when faced with the overwhelmingly anti-Israeli bias that is endemic in our liberal media and the BBC, we fail to ask ourselves what we would not do placed in the same position? The population of the United Kingdom of 63 millions is nine times that of Israel. In July 2006, to take one example entirely at random, Hezbollah crossed the border of Lebanon into Israel and killed 8 patrolmen and kidnapped 2 others, and that summer fired 4,000 Katyusha rockets into Israel which killed a further 43 civilians. Now, if we multiply those numbers by nine to get the British equivalent, just imagine what we would not do if a terrorist organization based as close as Calais were to fire 36,000 rockets into Sussex and Kent, killing 387 British civilians, after killing 72 British servicemen in an ambush and capturing a further eighteen? I put it to you that there is absolutely no lengths to which our Government would not go to protect British subjects under those circumstances, and quite right too. So why should Israel be expected to behave any differently?
There has hardly been a single year since Brigadier-General Deedes established AIA in 1949 when a speaker has not been able to say that Israel faced a crisis, and on some occasions – in 1956, 1967, 1973 and especially in the face of the present Iranian nuclear programme today – these were existential. At a time when Barrack Obama appears to be least pro-Israeli president since Eisenhower, the dangers are even more obvious. For there is simply no way that Obama will prevent Ahmadinejad, perhaps Jewry’s most viciously outspoken and dangerous foe since the death of Adolf Hitler, to acquire a nuclear Bomb.
None of us can pretend to know what lies ahead for Israel, but if she decides pre-emptively to strike against such a threat – in the same way that Nelson pre-emptively sank the Danish Fleet at Copenhagen and Churchill pre-emptively sank the Vichy Fleet at Oran – then she can expect nothing but condemnation from the British Foreign Office. She should ignore such criticism, because for all the fine work done by this Association over the past six decades - work that’s clearly needed as much now as ever before – Britain has only ever really been at best a fairweather friend to Israel.
Although History does not repeat itself, it’s cadences do occasionally rhyme, and if the witness of History is testament to anything it is testament to this:
That in her hopes of averting the threat of a Second Holocaust, only Israel can be relied upon to act decisively in the best interests of the Jews.
My note:
It appeares, the "new" antisemitism, that is anti-Zionism, is not so new. British empire practiced it from the very beginning of the Zionism.
Machiavelli Incarnate
[QUOTE=houseknight;2167229My note:
It appeares, the "new" antisemitism, that is anti-Zionism, is not so new. British empire practiced it from the very beginning of the Zionism.[/QUOTE]
Don't you know Jews were thrown out of England during Cromwell's time? And they weren't allowed back for a very long time!
Looks like you don't really know your history....they were thrown out for cause as they were run out of other early European states ..I think it's about 47 times in 1000 years Jews have been wandering...
...Did you ever think the world couldn't have been wrong all those times.... just as the world isn't wrong now...
Why does everything seem like such a surprise to Jews?..
Like it's the first time when it's your history... .... but the world has known Jews for centuries..Ever think 'why they weren't exterminated already'..and allowed to just repeat their behavior with the same results for centuries?
Could all those persecutions have been way exaggerated like the holocaust?
TATA
paphiopedilum warrior
There's something that you and your ilk fail to understand. That is that there may be people who are Jewish who are assholes and may piss you off, that doesn't mean that all Jews are assholes.....well in you case, you make that leap. That is bigotry plain and simple ScareJew.
"...if life is going to exist in a Universe of this size, then the one thing it cannot have is a sense of proportion." - Trin Tragula
Machiavelli Incarnate
Originally Posted by ScareJew88
Anything that doesn't qualify as a pat on the back to a jew, is automatically anti semitism. It could never be something like, say, jews doing things that piss people off? Naaaaaaw, jews are perfect!
[QUOTE=Trintragula;2168113]There's something that you and your ilk fail to understand. That is that there may be people who are Jewish who are assholes and may piss you off, that doesn't mean that all Jews are assholes.....well in you case, you make that leap. That is bigotry plain and simple ScareJew.[/QUOTE]
Aren't you saying the same thing? You run around these boards screaming 'I'm different''..and you're telling him he's the same as everyone else...isn't that being a bigot too?...Maybe I don't know the definition of bigot?
Be careful what you call people..that you don't show you're one also...
TATA
Wise-Cracker
[quote=Eann;2169693]I was about to say the same thing.
Machiavelli Incarnate
Have you ever actually READ the White Paper?
Machiavelli Incarnate
Like the holocaust lies...so were those Nobel Prizes..
TATA
Study: Israeli students' achievements ranked lowest in West
Alarming data: Research surveying Israeli pupils' scores in international exams over last decades puts Jewish state at bottom of Western nations' list
Yaheli Moran Zelikovich Published: 12.20.09, 17:48 / Israel News
Israeli students' achievements in international exams over the last decade were ranked lowest among Western nations, according to a new comparative study conducted by the Taub Center for Social Policy Studies. The study further demonstrated that Israel had the highest education gaps in the West.
The study, which surveyed the state of education in 1999-2009, compared Israel's scholastic achievements with 25 leading countries in the fields of reading, math and science.
Excluding one test, Israeli pupils' scores were the lowest compared to other countries throughout the last ten years. The nation's top students, those ranked in the top 5%, were also at the bottom compared with their Western counterparts.
Taub Center manager who also conducted the study Prof. Dan Ben-David said, "Within a decade these countries' graduates will compete with their Israeli counterparts in all crucial areas of life. The 'toolbox' level with which Israel provides its children will position them at a disadvantage, which many will not be able to escape.
"One of the main goals of a public education system should be the narrowing of gaps in opportunities by providing an equal set of tools. Ironically, it is in a country which has one of the highest income inequalities in the Western world that the education system operates in the exact opposite direction. "
The study's analysts also believe that its findings paint a better picture than actually exists in reality, since the exams' sample did not aptly represent the entire Israeli population, which did not include the ultra-Orthodox sector.
"There is a very large group of students which is not educated on core subjects. As a result, the international tests' results, which are already problematic for Israel, indicate a better state than exists in practice. This comes after a previous generation of Israelis won more science Nobel Prizes than virtually any other country," Ben-David said.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks